Tagged With "Army"

http://kitup.military.com/2016...es-machine-guns.html Army Touts Improved Lube for Rifles, Machine Guns FEBRUARY 23, 2016 The U.S. Army is touting a new and improved lubricant for small arms ranging from the standard M4 carbine to the M240 machine gun, officials said. Unlike the conventional “wet lubricant” known as CLP (for cleaner, lubricant and preservative), the new product uses a dry surface treatment known as durable solid lubricant, or DSL, according to a press release on Tuesday from...

According to the article it sounds like it is a coating. Since it is applied during the making of the BCG it should replace phosphate. I doubt it will replace CLP though. Slip 2000 does that already XD

I will predict that this is stupid and will turn out to be worse, rather than an improvement. I can see this being promoted as the magic cure, and weapons maintenance will fail, 'cause they got that DSL shit on there, see. A clean weapon, per most uneducated military knuckleheads, is a dry weapon, and we know how that works. It chokes, and said knucklehead rants and foams at the mouth because it was "dirty". Never mind that it was drier than Hillary. This is not hard. After all this time,...

The Army couldn't really come up with a better acronym than DSL? "Yeah, those DSLs can take the chrome off a trailer hitch, or a firing pin" "Grab the donkey dick, the elephant jizz and some DSL's before we roll out on patrol" "No, no really...I was talking about the gun lube"

So here's my question. Do we need a new surface coating for the BCG and is phosphate a good enough coating for a BCG? Would something like ionbond, nib, nickel Teflon, this new DSL coating, etc not only last longer but improve reliability? Or is it all snake oil.

My engineer buddies are speculating that the coating is Diamond-Like Carbon. DLC is already used for coating endmills and drill bits, as well as some higher-end razors (according to the link). Has anyone here had experience with using DLC coating tooling in an industrial capacity?

At the risk of mentioning him, a few years ago Gabe Suarez was using DLC on...something? I recall the forum post, but I don't remember if it was a Glock finish, a rifle finish, a mag finish. I don't think I've heard of it since.

Don't read too much into it. Drill Sgts just want to be able to give troops something to keep them busy. And a shiny dry bolt is easier to inspect, and subsequently discipline a recruit for failing to meet the standard....kinda like spit shining boots. Note, it was right here on LFer where the virtues of Robar coatings were extolled....so if Robar does it, it's ok, but if the US Army does it, it's not? A better finish is a better finish. Should we have stuck with, or return to blued steel...

R. Moran, this wasn't my basic training. I was cadre and the DS who gave the instructions to do so, should have known better since we were classmates in the armorer's course. Perpetuating the cycle. I don't think anyone here is knocking improving finishes, rather that the Army will treat this as a stand alone to lubrication and as some sort of end all be all. I bring up the private as an illustration of how overly optimistic they're being with this coating eliminating parts wear.

I'd be more apt to blame institutional resistance to change and simple ignorance as the culprit...not a cabal of individuals looking to maintain power. I was actually pretty surprised at how they handled weapons maintenance at BOC. Emphasis was on keeping the weapon well lubricated and the only time we did a white glove type clean was halfway through the POI and when we turned in our weapons during check out. The rest of the time the focus was on a functional clean which entailed hitting the...

There has been a move in the US Army to get away from that shit for a long time. There was a PM Monthly out in the mid 90s...I was stationed in HI at the time, it stated that the 3 day cleaning regimen and white glove inspection was excessive, unneeded and detrimental to the weapon. It should be cleaned once in accordance with the operators manual, which is very minimal/basic, and thats it. When I brought this to my 1SG...his response was..."I don't care, we are gonna do it the same way...

I don't think I'm resistant to advancement as much as I am just plain skeptical about the need for lube to go away as is claimed in the article. It seems like I've heard that claim more than once, and I have yet to see people going away from traditional lubes. No argument that there are just plain ignorant dicks in the military - hell, I was one of them. But I don't see this as a replacement for CLP (or did I miss that in the article?), and I think it is awful fucking healthy to mistrust...

Mac, I thought about that too. If they don't get the education piece right on this (to include the cleaning schedule and WHICH WEAPONS this pertains to, as it is applied during production), we will go down that exact road again. And Counselor, yeah, that steel brush is to take off the annoying finish that is still on there... Tankersteve

". . . .You can use a steel brush to knock off any residue, and you don’t even have to worry about reapplying anything.” Oh, no. Please - stop it. How many people have claimed this so far? I'm sorry - but I've seen VERY RECENTLY some army guys squirt lube with a squirt bottle just on the outside of the BCG through the ejection port. I didn't say anything, but they didn't seem interested in getting the lube where it needed to be. That's what needs to be fixed. Not apply a dry lube and tell...

I have literally seen a basic training private turn a bolt silver because he was told to make it as shiny as his firing pin by his drill sergeant.... I don't think this coating will fair any better against an overly motivated and undereducated private. Education would be a simpler and much better solution, not to mention cheaper.

Guy in my basic training company thought he'd be high speed and used Brasso & some other cleaning goop to shine up his M16 A2. Took the finish right off his receiver. Drill Sgt. had a frikkin field day with that one. Lots of "It just needs pearl grips now" type comments. Only issues I saw when in were due to improper maintenance or bad mags.

If they were applying it directly to the BCG that's a step forward for some. At most of our OSUT ranges we were instructed to lock our bolts to the rear. Someone came around with a spray bottle and applied a fuck ton (metric) to the upper receiver.... which immediately ran out the magazine well and onto everything.

No, it won't work. I feel ya on the Bradley life though. The ARC/Peltor set up only works for helmets of a 'high ear cut' such as opscore, team Wendy, Mtek. Unless something has changed, that's what I know to the best of my ability. solutions: 1) I run peltor's under my ACH. It's pretty comfortable for me, I just removed the center pad and run the head band through there. Awesome in the winter, sucks in the summer. 2) peltor I believe has a behind the neck band, instead of the over the head...

I also run the peltors under my lid (USMC issued LWH that I, ahem, acquired/found/picked up when I was on AD). I run a large LWH when I'd normally wear a medium. This makes it a bit easier and more comfortable with the peltors underneath. I use the thicker (3/4 in?) pads to make up the difference. I also ran a length of adhesive loop velcro along the top of my peltors head band. This interfaces with the velcro hook coins in the helmet to keep it all locked together well in conjuction with...

I will preface this by saying that I have never even seen a Bradley except for photo's and video, so take this for what you paid for it. I run Sordins with the behind the neck band with my helmets. They are very comfortable, with a wide soft strap that goes over the head to hold them in place. It fits under the pads, and is thin enough that you don't even feel it. I chose it because I wanted ear pro that I could wear with, or without a helmet, and it is definitely more comfortable than the...

So, I got to play around with these a while ago. It's a weird modularish system. It seemed like they were trying to make a flak that was scalable from plate carrier size to MTVish size. It was like a MOLLE over sleeve for the slim PC portion. It was weird how that worked. The outer sleeve didn't feel like it had extra protection in it and the people running the event didn't have a firm answer, though the consensus was that it didn't. I didn't personally see the purpose of the outer part...

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/articles/new-marines-united-spinoff-drive-includes-image-of-an-unconscious-woman OK, first, ignore the full link wording - Defense News and their .mil Times website has this as the link to the article. My point is that the system being tested looks like it uses First Spear Tubes. Is it one of their PCs? After the Army mess with Multi-cam, I'd be very leery about partnering with DOD/Army if I was a vendor working in that realm. Tankersteve

Jake, thanks for that, I think. After some conversations with LFers, my opinion on DoD acquisitions is pretty low right now. The Tubes thing is just another run of it. Although the idea of eliminating the quick-disconnect stuff is good - a PC is easy to remove because it is simple/minimalist. It is simple/minimalist to save weight. Yet let's add weight for a quick disconnect, thus making it not light or simple/minimalist...SMH. And the attempt to once again, do all things with one 'modular'...

Looks good initially. I bet that as a cost-cutting measure, they elected to skimp on integrated ventilation. I don't see any signs of it on the side-plate pockets. The laser cut MOLLE material is a good weight and cost-cutting notion, but it has a tendency to rip at the edges (look at First-Spear equipment with a-lot of use for examples of this) so a form of stress relief through rounding those edges can be accomplished. Look at Raptor Tactical's laser cut sections to get an idea, they have...

This might be a dumb question, but I'm curious. If the the Marine Corps wants to develop a new plate carrier and armor plates, why wouldn't they announce an RFP like the DoD does for other projects? Rather than try to develop an improved plate carrier on their own.

Usablity Methods for Product Development: This is a practice area. When I have the money for it, I've employed researchers who do this full time. Teams of researchers no less. It is a scientifically-pursued discipline, and therefore there are piles of books on it. But I'll boil it down as much as I can to buzzwords and oversimplifications because one key thing is that: Pretty good usability methods are vastly better than well-done marketing methods. There's probably some other name for them,...

I was going to ask the same thing. Can they REALLY not find an off the shelf, currently available piece of webbing and nylon that holds armor and Marines can attach pouches and shit to? I mean... really? There must be over 200 unique designs out there at least, and then even more if paying attention to minor differences. Not one single one of those is close enough to accomplish our mission? Get. The. Fuck. Out. Blowing money for the sake of money and the end product will be worse than...

When I participated in the user review survey around 2013, they were looking to hear what was important to users. As a guy with LAV experience, they wanted to know what was good and bad about the scaleable PC we had at the time. One element they were looking at was building a new SPC that had a very slick base layer like the old CVC armor vests that armor guys used to wear. If you're inside an armor shell, projectiles to your torso are not your problem. So they wanted to learn what donning...

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.